The Future Of

World Leadership

Episode Summary

In times of crisis, effective leadership is critical. Former WA Premier Geoff Gallop discusses the importance of leadership at home and overseas with strategic affairs analyst Alexey Muraviev.

Episode Notes

We live in a world defined by constant change. To keep up, leaders at all levels should be highly adaptable and collaborative, however it’s debatable whether all our world leaders possess those qualities. 

On the international stage, we see wildly different personalities and leadership styles, from the brashness of Trump to the brutality of Duterte, to the poise of Ardern.  

We’re yet to reach accord on international crises such as climate change, health and migration; which leads us to ask whether there’s a better way.  

David is joined by former WA Premier Professor Geoff Gallop AC and strategic affairs analyst Associate Professor Alexey Muraviev to discuss leadership on the world stage and how countries can lead on issues of national and international importance.  

Learn more

Got any questions, or suggestions for future topics?

Email thefutureof@curtin.edu.au.

Curtin University supports academic freedom of speech. The views expressed in The Future Of podcast may not reflect those of the university.

Music: OKAY by 13ounce Creative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported — CC BY-SA 3.0 Music promoted by Audio Library

You can read the full transcript for the episode here

Episode Transcription

Announcer:

This is The Future Of, where experts share their vision of the future and how their work is helping shape it for the better.

David Blayney:

I'm David Blayney. We live in a world defined by constant change. To keep up, leaders at all levels should be highly adaptable and collaborative. However, it's debatable whether all our world leaders possess these qualities. On the international stage, we see wildly different personalities and leadership styles, from the brashness of Trump to the brutality of Duterte, to the poise of Ardern. We're yet to reach accord on international crises such as climate change, health and migration, which leads us to ask whether there's a better way.

David Blayney:

Joining me today, are former Western Australian Premier, Professor Geoff Gallop, and Strategic Affairs Analyst at Curtin University, Professor Alexey Muraviev. Thank you for much for joining me, Geoff and Alexey.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Thank you.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Thank you.

David Blayney:

Geoff, the COVID-19 pandemic has certainly put our world leaders to the test. What lessons have we learned?

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Well, I hope there are a number of things that will now be given more serious attention within government. I guess the first is to be prepared. We live in a world where crises can happen. We've seen it in relationship to terrorism. There are prospects that as the climate changes, there will be a severe impact on some of our lifestyles and environmental conditions. In this case, we've had the pandemic. We've got to assume that there could be another one. So I think being prepared, making sure that the systems are in place, the infrastructure's available, what you need to deal with a pandemic is easily available within your own jurisdiction, those sorts of things.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

But I think more specifically, I think we've learnt that our publicly operated systems need to be in good shape, particularly our public health system, but not only our public health system, our environmental health systems. We can't afford to ignore the things that we share, and a clean environment is a crucial part of that, and that means an infrastructure of public goods to make sure that that's in place. So I think more emphasis on the public sector and on public institutions is an important part of our civilization.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Finally, I think one of the lessons that we've clearly learnt, not only in respect of the pandemic but also in respect of the severe fires we had the eastern states late last year, is the importance of public engagement. This is not just an issue that relates to the [inaudible 00:02:48] of the public, their capacity to absorb arguments and respond in a rational way, but also about our access to people. One of the important points is we've got to be able to communicate with them and make sure that they know where they can play a role, as we're dealing in this case with the virus.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So I guess they're the three things I'd focus on. Let's be prepared and make sure that that's done, and the jurisdictions that have done that well have come through better than the jurisdictions that have really avoided dealing with the issue. Secondly, making sure our public systems are working well, particularly public health. And, thirdly, making sure that we can engage with the community so that they can be part of the solution.

David Blayney:

Alexey, the U.S. has taken on a fairly insular foreign policy approach in recent times. Do you think the pandemic and the ensuing economic slump might lead to a change?

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Well, we're yet to fully understand the strategic implications of the pandemic because we're talking about the ongoing global emergency. What has become quite clear is that the pandemic has seriously put to a test not just the global liberal model but certainly the very concept of globalization.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Global supply chains have been severely affected by the pandemic. National economies have been severely affected by the pandemic. Our dependency on foreign supplies to some extent has been compromised, and that certainly raises a number of strategic questions: Do we, as a nation, and does the world come back to the original model, pre-pandemic situation, or do we accept that what we have experienced with COVID-19 is just the tip of the iceberg and we should be expecting more pandemics in the future, as some forecasters suggest? In this sense we need to change national as well global modus operandi: Do we need to become more sovereign and self-reliant? Do we still want to pursue the same degree of openness and engagement? These are the big strategic questions that national and international leaders will have to address, and something that the nations will obviously have to address.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

In terms of the approach that U.S. President Trump has taken in focusing more on nation state building and taking more of an insular approach, it may be symptomatic of the times. I wouldn't be suggesting necessarily it's just Trump's style. I think this is something perhaps that we may see more and more, particularly after the recognition that we will be living in a new world.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So, the pandemic can also be viewed perhaps as one of those potential watershed events that will transform our psyche and will transform how we live and do things. So the change of behaviour of national elites and international elites may be adjusted accordingly. Failure to do so would create more problems for the communities, for the nations, as well for the countries.

David Blayney:

Geoff, democracy has worked pretty well for, the most part, for us, but as we've seen in the U.S., it can be undermined by foreign interference and also the rise of very strong media influencers. Has the democratic system perhaps reached its sell-by date? Do you think there might be a better way for us to pick who's in charge?

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Well, I acknowledge the couple of points you made there about the influencers that exist within our democratic system today, and they're clearly factors. But I think there's a bigger issue here. Just think about all of the things that Alexey just said about the changed environment in which we're now working, and think about the big issues that we have to address.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

We have to address the issue of climate. Getting economic growth, yes, but with a sustainable flavour to it so that we're not undermining our environmental amenity and the environment in which we live. And making sure also that we have a better society in the distribution of the goods and services that we create. These are big challenges and they require, in our current world, some structural changes.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

This is where democracy's finding it tough going. It's underpinned by the concept of freedom. So interest groups and individuals have the freedom to express themselves, to organise, to fight for their particular corner, and they do it very well. Unfortunately, of course, it can also lead to a log jam, or it can lead to a stalemate which makes it very, very difficult to address the big issues.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So I think this is where leadership comes in: Do we have the leadership that we're going to need to make sure all of those challenges and the informational political order, the informational economic system that Alexey's just mentioned, are we going to have the leadership in place to work through those issues and at the same time minimize the potentiality there will be for conflict and possibly war? Because in earlier times, when these big structural changes are going on and there's a redistribution of power internationally, it can create a source for conflict and possibly warfare. So do we have the leadership to be able to do that?

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So democracy still, on the basis of all of the evidence we have available, is the best way to conduct things. Holding governments accountable to people, any agencies of accountability like corruption commissions, auditor generals, having an independent judiciary, these are fundamental features of a civilized society, but within that framework it's possible for all of the forces that exist to get into a log jam and you can't deal with the big issues, and the temptations then come we'll give all the power to one person and they'll sort all these things out. Usually what happens, of course, they don't sort those things out and they create new forms of tyranny.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So we're really desperate, I think, in the world at the moment, for some very serious leadership. Think of the leadership we've got after the Second World War, the Marshall plan in Europe. Think about the GATT program to deal with international trade, the Keynesian mechanisms to bring order to the international economy. We're going to need to some big thinkers and some big leaders along those lines so that democracy can be preserved as the best way in which to deal with the differences in our society. If we don't do it, there's every chance that we'll drift into an authoritarian style system which, on the surface, people say will produce results. It may do, but at the expense of human liberty.

David Blayney:

It's good to hear that democracy's still got a fighting chance. Alexey, with world technology moving at such a fast pace, are you still surprised by this trend of... well, from one particular leader... of policy decision by Twitter?

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Well, I do sincerely hope that this is more of a public relations stand rather than a form of disseminating strategic decisions. I would still want to assume that a superpower the calibre of the United States would have established mechanisms on how to reach decisions. Obviously not unilaterally, but on the basis of informed knowledge, and disseminate decisions accordingly, via appropriate channels.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

I think that particular style, you can call it Twitter style, is more of a publicity stunt, is more of a PR exercise. Not to create an illusion of transparency in the decision-making, but rather than achieve certain political objectives by demonstrating what the leader is trying to do, what the leader is failing to do. And obviously gather not only short-term dividends but also perhaps achieve some practical outcomes by, for example, influencing public opinion and public support in a democratic system when you effectively want to promote and push your particular agenda and you inform the public, "This is my idea, this is my thoughts, and this is how I tell people how I want to do it," certainly in forms that would resonate with certain elements of the community. By that you attempt to mobilise this community so they can apply their own pressure on your political targets from the bottom, not just from the top. So it's a kind of combined approach but I don't think it's a symptom of the time.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

What is symptomatic today is the technology, as you correctly stated, is moving at such a fast pace, it makes the world much smaller. The world is not getting bigger. If we think of geography technology matrix, technological innovation, continued technological innovation makes the world smaller and that intensifies the processes that are happening across the globe: the political, the economic, the military strategic. From the point of leadership, current and future, it reduces the decision-making time. It places leaders under greater stress and under greater pressure than ever before to come up with solutions, to come up with answers, to come up with counter-strategies, almost in an instant because of the evolving situation, the situation that is rapidly changing, that is constantly fluctuating, and the amount of information. Not necessarily accurate information, but anything that just pops up through a variety of sources, a variety of channels, and a variety of means.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So the constant flow of information, the constant injection of raw, unconcerned data complicates situational awareness. It makes the decision-making much harder because, first of all, you have to determine what is accurate, what is authentic, and what is false, so-called fake news. On the other hand, you need to do it under severe time constraints. So that really transforms how leaders operate. Obviously they have to become technologically aware. They have to become technologically competent. Not necessarily move everything onto Twitter or other forms of social media, but they have to be aware of this new parallel reality in which they exist and previously in which questions of traditional style of governance may actually be exposed in one form or another, either through deliberate leaks or through just incidental release via a social media tool, by one of your staffers, and the list goes on.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So it doesn't necessarily lead to greater transparency. I think it may actually complicate and confuse things and processes because it almost feels like you have this Big Brother effect when you operate under magnified glass and you're getting scrutinised in one way or another.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So Twitter diplomacy or Twitter decision-making perhaps is an attempt to take control over this parallel universe in which leaders find themselves operating, particularly in transparent societies, in democratic societies because obviously this is not necessarily the problem for autocratic or dictatorial regimes where you can effectively police and control and manage all aspects of life, including the flow of information and technologies that could be available to your electorate.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

But certainly the crucial point that I've been making is the decision-making time, the response time, and the ability to be able to function effectively in this constant information flow in the world that has actually become much smaller as a result of this globalisation and social media revolution, rather than bigger. You no longer have days or weeks, let alone months, to come up with a decision. This time, particularly in times of crisis, you may be limited to hours or even minutes, and that obviously requires a different quality in the current as well as a new line of leaders who will be emerging on the horizon.

David Blayney:

Geoff, Jacinda Ardern has provided a bit of a masterclass in leadership on the world stage. What aspects of her leadership style have contributed to her success?

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Yes, it's very interesting to observe. I think I'll make the first point. New Zealand's not a nation to be underestimated in terms of public policy innovation, over many years, in a whole range of areas. They're a small country. To survive, they have to be innovative. So I make that general point that in a way, Jacinda Ardern also reflects an aspect of New Zealand which has always fascinated me, that I've always felt that, on a whole range of issues, that they're one step ahead of us in terms of dealing with them.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Now let's go to her specifically though. From my point of view, why do I think she's been effective? I won't try and give you a public opinion analysis, I'll just say what it is in my mind that I think about when I see her and listen to her. The first is, she's got wonderful communication skills. She speaks very, very clearly. She answers all of the questions that are thrown at her very well. She doesn't give the impression that is the normal spin politician. So there's a bit of authority attached to her when she's talking on particular issues. I find that very attractive.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Let me do a contrast. There's was an article, I think, in The Conversation journal on this very question. When Boris Johnson spoke about how Britain was going to deal with these issues, he recorded it and just put it out. She did a press conference, spoke very, very clearly about where New Zealand was going to go, how they would judge each step along the way, and answered questions from the media. Immediately you've got a contrast: someone who's just sort of putting it out there, not really interested in getting the questions, and a very limited form of analysis; Jacinda Ardern, very clear, showed where she wants to take the community, was willing to answer questions.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So that's number one. A very good communicator and, as we know, even though we've just had a discussion around the other ways in which people communicate with each other through all of the new media and the Twitter and the Facebook and all of this sort of thing, in the end, when you're in the process of political leadership and you're a Prime Minister, you've got to deal with the public very face-to-face through the media that's available, and she does that quite brilliantly.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

For a long time now there's been this debate going on in our community about whether or not we're measuring our progress in an effective way. Inevitably, we come back always to the gross domestic product: Now what's happening to GDP? Are we growing? Are we declining? Are we in a recession? Are we in a super growth phase? These are the sorts of issues [inaudible 00:20:14]. But when you seriously look at what matters to people, there's a whole lot of other things that are in there as well. There's the quality of the communities they live in, the cleanliness of the air, the general environmental amenity, their access to the public recreation spaces. There's the healthcare system, the education system, and whether or not it's giving everyone a chance in life, whether or not it's treating everyone equally in terms of their access to health services and whatever. And you could keep going with the list.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

We say that we think these things are as important as economic growth, which also is important, but then we do nothing about it. Whereas in New Zealand, she's quite willing to come out there with her finance minister and say, "Look, we're going to judge our performance by the progress indicators rather than just by the GDP," and to communicate with the people around the sort of targets that they have. So it's that new thinking that she's sown.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

We could add to the list of good communications and creative thinking. We could add to the list, I guess, also her response to the terror incident that occurred there, the empathy she showed to the minority population which, in that case, the Muslim population that was under attack, the empathy she showed.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So I agree with you. I think she's certainly someone who stands out on the world stage at the moment. From my point of view, I love the fact that she takes up new ideas like the growth based progress indicator. I'm glad that she shows that empathy towards minority groups, to reassure them that they're welcome in their community. But finally, also I just think it's great that she's willing to be innovative.

David Blayney:

Alexey, what do you make of Jacinda Ardern's leadership?

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Well, I completely agree with Geoff's assessment. For an island nation, being a leader of an island nation is a challenge. Being a leader of an island nation that finds itself in the middle of a global pandemic is a challenge on the double, and I think how she navigated that challenge effectively, decisively, with a great degree of compassion but also with a great degree of firmness, are all these qualities that an effective leader should display. The outcome that she managed to achieve speaks absolutely strongly in favour of her leadership style, how she performs as a head of state.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

The first challenge, as Geoff alluded to, obviously came at the time of that horrible terrorist attack that New Zealand have suffered. In times like this, true leaders emerge, when they come to the party, and not in a populist style but in a personal, compassionate style, when the nation understands the leader, the head of state. That on one hand obviously needs to demand a degree of self-removal from personal likes and dislikes, but not in a dehumanising way, but more in a way that should not cloud this leader's judgement and the decision-making. Jacinda rose beautifully at that particular time, demonstrating her personal involvement, demonstrating her human side, and at the same time showcasing her fairness in terms of reaching out to the community that's been affected by that tragedy, but her decisiveness in terms of implementing new gun laws and so on and so forth.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So I think that was a massive test for her and a test that really helped her to firm up her experience, give her much needed capacity to respond to crisis. So when the pandemic hit New Zealand, I think she found herself in the prime of her political form and also knowing what does it take to take the nation through something that affects all and everyone, and she demonstrated it so well, but on a scale that was obviously much greater than the terrorist attack that shook New Zealand.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Could I just add something there?

David Blayney:

Yes, of course.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Following on from what Alexey's just said, going back to the question on democracy, and the point I made that the threat to democracy is these internal issues that are log jamming and that we're not getting the solutions that we need for the big issues and, ultimately, you have to find those in any system. You can't just let things drift along. You have to deal with the big issues, as hard as they are.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

I think what Jacinda Ardern has also shown is she can take us up the ladder a bit and say, "Look, these are the big issues we have to address in terms of New Zealand. There's the health and education system, the environment. Let's try and have a package of measures that is consistent across the public policy spectrum and take New Zealand forward." That will inevitably mean some interests are going to have to compromise from the positions that they're in.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

So creative leadership can lift us up out of this log jam and allow democracy to work as we know it can. So democracy is still the best way to do things but it does need that leadership element to give it a little bit of context and a little bit of direction rather than just being a response to what the popular opinion of the time is. So I think she gives us hope that democracy can actually work well.

David Blayney:

I guess there's a lot that we can learn from our friends across the ditch. Alexey, what do you think would be the ideal future global leadership model?

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Well, we need to understand we are living in turbulent times, in times of global uncertainty and rapid change and massive unrest, and obviously that requires particular qualities from current and future leaders.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

To start with, an effective leader in times like this cannot afford to subscribe to policies of appeasement. If the leader is trying to be populist, if the leader is trying to appease the community, or elements of the community, and would only be concerned about approval ratings, particularly over the short-term, as the majority of Western leaders are bound to, operating between the election circles, it would affect not only the leadership style but the quality of leadership. That leads to one of the first qualities that an effective leader in the current situation should display, and something that Geoff referred to earlier in the conversation.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

An effective leader today should have the courage, should have the courage to be decisive. Should have the courage to talk to people, to engage the people. Should have the courage at times to make decisions that may seem to be unpopular but on the other hand may prove to be absolutely vital and necessary, particularly in times of emergencies, and this is something that I think the pandemic has demonstrated. The majority of leaders that sailed through this first wave of crisis had to make hard decisions, had to have the courage to make hard decisions, and this is really important.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

An effective leader of the future has to be adaptive. The environment changes, and changes rapidly, and you cannot simply subscribe and follow one particular model that you may feel comfortable about. You have to adopt situational leadership. You have to change modus operandi. You have to change and be flexible about decisions in accordance with the environment in which you live.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

An effective leader should also be a visionary. There is nothing worse than being a reactive leader, when you respond to something that has already occurred, when you engage in consequence management. You need to be able to predict, and you need to be able to prevent or take advantage of something that may be coming your way or towards your nation. So you need to be a visionary and that requires skills, that requires greater knowledge and professional competence.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

A leader that is entirely dependent on an army of advisors becomes a victim of this network. You need to have your own skills and the ability to make the decisions, sometimes perhaps against the advice that may be offered to you, and that requires a strong degree of professional competence, as well as confidence. Leadership is about confidence. Leadership is about displaying that firmness and confidence because people trust you with power. You've been elected by the people. You represent people power, and people expect you to perform, be effective, when required be decisive, be brave and be courageous, but also be compassionate, as we discussed in the case of Jacinda Ardern. Perhaps that is something that not every modern leader, particularly in the Western world, displays.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

You need to have also a degree of charisma. Not charisma in the sense you have to become an entertainer because you cannot appease to your electorate by other means, but you should have something that people will see that would allow them to be drawn to you.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

So these are the qualities that I believe an effective leader of these uncertain times should be displaying. If a democratic leader would fail to display any of these qualities, either democracy will suffer or the alternative is going to be an autocratic or authoritarian leadership, which may prove to be conditionally effective and conditionally more suitable simply because you would use coercive means to compensate for more effective ways to govern and achieve tasks that people invested you in the first instance.

David Blayney:

Well, fingers crossed we can see more of those qualities from our future leaders. Geoff, do you have anything else you'd like to add?

Professor Geoff Gallop:

No. Thank you very much, and all the best with your work.

David Blayney:

Thank you very much. Well, I guess that brings us to the end of our discussion. Thank you both very much for joining us for the podcast and providing your expert analysis and insight into the future of leadership.

Professor Geoff Gallop:

Thank you.

Professor Alexey Muraviev:

Thank you.

David Blayney:

You've been listening to The Future Of, a podcast powered by Curtin University. If you have any questions about today's show, please feel free to get in touch by following the links in the show notes. Bye for now.